The ACT government has been in power for more than 22 years and is losing its ability to deliver what the residents of Canberra need, writes community leader DAVID DENHAM.

A good example of how the ACT government is losing its ability to deliver for residents is the handling of governance for the new planning system.

Governance was not working in the previous system, with both the government and certifiers failing to comply with the planning rules.

The ACT Planning Authority (ACTPLA) was a standout culprit. Our association, the Griffith Narrabundah Community Association, requested a review by the ACT Civil & Administrative Tribunal (ACAT) of five development applications to build three supportive houses in Griffith on five blocks in the low-density residential planning zone (RZ1). 

ACTPLA approved these applications. The trouble was that supportive housing involves disabled tenants. They need buildings with wider doors for wheelchairs, low gradient sites, wider garages to transport wheelchairs and so on.

The Australian Standard for supportive housing lists 102 parameters that must meet the requirements for supportive housing. ACTPLA approved the applications even though several of the standards were not met. The result would have been squashing three dwellings on to each block rather than two. In other words, treating disabled tenants as second-class citizens.

The ACAT supported our analysis and refused the five applications. Subsequently, Housing ACT has only proposed compliant developments in our suburb.

Certifiers behaving badly

The main complaint by residents of the previous system, was that developers were not complying with the planning rules, particularly for the DA-exempt knock down rebuilds in low-density residential zones. 

Buildings were constructed that exceeded the solar envelope, creating overshadowing; driveways were too steep – in one case, vehicles had to enter the garage in reverse gear; concrete driveways were built within the drip zones of trees on verges (reducing the supply of water to the trees), and no consideration was given to overlooking of neighbours. The certifiers were not doing their job.

How good is the new-era governance?

Instead of trying to rectify the governance, the government decided to develop a new planning system from scratch. 

This ostensibly aims to provide better outcomes, but there are hardly any mandatory rules. So how can the effectiveness of any governance system be assessed?

It was not until after the new Planning Act and Territory Plan had been approved by the Assembly, and all the other supplementary legislation was in place that the government acted. 

It appointed an independent “ACT Planning System Governance Review” in late December 2023.

A typical cart before the horse!

Unfortunately, the reviewers were only asked “to consider the views of people with a direct, advisory, regulatory or statutory role”, specifically: 

the ACT’s chief planner; the National Capital Design Review Panel; the ACT government architect, the conservator of flora and fauna” and another 10 officers, all of whom work for the government! 

It is difficult to see how the review could be independent when the reviewers could only interact with government-chosen stakeholders. 

In the terms of reference, there is no mention of several important stakeholders, such as the Master Builders Association, the Property Council or any community councils. 

All the reviewers can do is read the submissions made by these groups. And these were written before the legislation was finalised.

The people who have direct experience with the planning system, the Canberran residents, are not considered to be key stakeholders. 

It’s not the best way to proceed. The government should do better.

Dr David Denham AM is the president of the Griffith Narrabundah Community Association.